Comments on: Polygraph Examinations http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2007/07/polygraph-examinations.html the tao of criminal defense trial lawyering Tue, 16 Mar 2010 05:38:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: George Maschke http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2007/07/polygraph-examinations.html/comment-page-1#comment-185 George Maschke Sun, 08 Jul 2007 07:42:00 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/?p=181#comment-185 I think that in order to effectively counsel clients on the topic of polygraphy, lawyers need to understand how the procedure actually "works" (and doesn't). Polygraph "testing" depends on trickery, not science, which should come as no surprise, as it was developed by interrogators, not scientists. For a good overview of the topic, see Professor William G. Iacono's article, <a HREF="http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-018.shtml" REL="nofollow">"Forensic 'Lie Detection': Procedures Without Scientific Basis."</a><br/><br/>While polygraph procedure is inherently biased against the truthful, the outcome can be manipulated by either the examinee (through the use of simple countermeasures) or the examiner (by subtle rigging). Just because your client passes a polygraph administered by a polygrapher of your choosing doesn't mean that she will pass one administered by a police polygrapher. The safest path is to steer clear of this pseudoscientific procedure.<br/><br/>I'm a co-founder of <a HREF="http://antipolygraph.org" REL="nofollow">AntiPolygraph.org</a>, a non-profit, public interest website dedicated to exposing and ending waste, fraud, and abuse associated with lie detectors. We offer a great deal of documentation that may be of interest to attorneys dealing with polygraph issues. For a handy reference, see our e-book <i><a HREF="http://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf" REL="nofollow">The Lie Behind the Lie Detector</a></i> (1 mb PDF). I think that in order to effectively counsel clients on the topic of polygraphy, lawyers need to understand how the procedure actually “works” (and doesn’t). Polygraph “testing” depends on trickery, not science, which should come as no surprise, as it was developed by interrogators, not scientists. For a good overview of the topic, see Professor William G. Iacono’s article, “Forensic ‘Lie Detection’: Procedures Without Scientific Basis.”

While polygraph procedure is inherently biased against the truthful, the outcome can be manipulated by either the examinee (through the use of simple countermeasures) or the examiner (by subtle rigging). Just because your client passes a polygraph administered by a polygrapher of your choosing doesn’t mean that she will pass one administered by a police polygrapher. The safest path is to steer clear of this pseudoscientific procedure.

I’m a co-founder of AntiPolygraph.org, a non-profit, public interest website dedicated to exposing and ending waste, fraud, and abuse associated with lie detectors. We offer a great deal of documentation that may be of interest to attorneys dealing with polygraph issues. For a handy reference, see our e-book The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF).

]]>